Re: don't step into monkey's tarpit

I had no reason to think that you were talking about someone else The reason was fact that you are responding to a quote from a linked passage. Also the quote wasn't talking "about" someone else, it was talking "to" someone else. blah blah blah Good point! It is boring and tedious to tease apart the tangled web you weave. Your obfuscations are having exactly their intended effects, which is why people refer to you as a tar pit and why no one should even bother to have a conversation with you, unless they are (as in this instance) using the conversation as a demonstration of your trolling techniques and how to recognize and avoid getting mired in them. I didnt do anything of the sort The anything you are referring to happened when you used a prescriptivist lens to criticize someone for defining the words "molest" "rape" and "victim" in a way that a descriptivist would say is very common and ubiquitous in the wide world. The definition of prescriptivism was provided to you and your characterization of the very normal and common use of those words as "loaded language" and "dishonest" does fall under the definition of prescriptivism. you link to your own posts to imply that theres a general consensus You are free to believe whatever you want about the things that happen outside of your sphere of influence. Call them lies if it makes you feel better. Everyone is free to have their own land of make believe and describe it on BC any way that they choose and since there is no way for any of us to double check any of that, arguing over it seems rather a waste of time, unless your main point in coming to BC is to bother people and waste their time and in that case have at it. Just don't expect any legitimate habituates of the forum to accompany you on your goose chase. My sole intention in this thread was to point out that you are using loaded language, Which you did through a prescriptivist lens, and that's your right to think and speak that way, but whether you realize it or not, accusing someone who is using words in a very common and ubiquitous way of using "loaded language" means your beef is with the whole world and the way they view sex with children and on that point we can all agree that the whole wide world sees the situation differently to you. Maybe you are right and the whole wide world is wrong, but that seems unlikely. Still, continue to cling to your fringe beliefs if doing so is working for you.